Remember garbagegate? How about Cheriegate, tobaccogate or the row over the Queen Mum's funeral?
These are some of the so-called scandals which have dominated political reporting for frenzied periods over the past few years.
But I suspect few people could recall the details today.
Some journalists would see this as evidence of Tony Blair's ability to survive even serious allegations and emerge unscathed.
Many politicians, however, accuse the media of trivialising politics, ignoring the genuine issues in a never-ending search for wrongdoing.
And the constant negativity is said to damage the public's perception of politicians, which can threaten our democratic system itself. These concerns have been addressed in a pamphlet from the Hansard Society, an educational charity, and pollsters MORI.
It concludes that most of us still care about the issues which affect us, our families and the wider world - but we no longer believe Parliament can do anything about them, and have little respect for the political parties.
The paper, called MPs and Politics in our Time, is written by MP John Healey, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mark Gill, head of political research at the Ipsos - MORI Social Research Institute, and Declan McHugh, Director of the Hansard Society's Parliament and Governance Programme.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the authors say the media is partly to blame.
But in a thoughtful analysis they also highlight the failings of the political system itself - and even place a little of the blame on the public.
Their solution is to provide more opportunities for consulting voters, as well as establishing citizenship education firmly in the school curriculum.
There are also calls for reforms of Parliament, including measures to allow MPs to scrutinise Government policy in more detail. And the authors argue some of the rules restricting spending by MPs should be relaxed to allow them to communicate more effectively with constituents, for example by sending mailshots.
But they warn that " according to MPs, the role of the national media is a key element" in the " low regard" in which they are held. The regional press are not so bad, apparently.
The authors conclude: "Much media coverage of politics and politicians is short-term, selective and specific in the interests it highlights and interests."
But although they call for "a serious debate about the role and obligations of the media in a mature democracy", they have few practical suggestions beyond posing the question: "What responsibilities should the media accept?"
They are also, perhaps, too dismissive of the regional press, which has a combined circulation - including free papers - of around 32.5 million each week (national papers sell around 14 million daily).
And their complaint that 24-hour news channels make politicians seem " remote and out of touch" is bizarre.
Sky News and BBC 24 regularly show political speeches and press conferences, and Commons questions, at length and uncut.
Their motivation may be a need to fill up air-time, but the result is surely that politicians get exactly the platform they desire, free of media distortion.
Finally, there is almost no discussion of the role of flagship news shows such as the BBC Six O'clock bulletin.
This thoughtful pamphlet raises some important issues but can only be the start of a debate.
